New Year Sale 2026! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

Nutanix NCP-CN Exam - Topic 3 Question 2 Discussion

Actual exam question for Nutanix's NCP-CN exam
Question #: 2
Topic #: 3
[All NCP-CN Questions]

[Conduct NKP Fleet Management]

In an effort to control cloud cost consumption, auto-scale is configured to meet demands as needed.

What is the behavior for when nodes are scaled down?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B

by Caprice at Jun 14, 2025, 02:08 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium NCP-CN Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Peggie
2 months ago
Power-Off for stand-by is a common approach, right?
upvoted 0 times
...
Reynalda
2 months ago
I’m not so sure about that. Hibernate sounds plausible too.
upvoted 0 times
...
Patria
3 months ago
Wait, nodes can just be paused? That seems odd!
upvoted 0 times
...
Ernie
3 months ago
Definitely agree with that! CAPI deletion makes sense.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lavonda
3 months ago
I think the node gets deleted from the infrastructure provider.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rickie
3 months ago
I thought nodes just get paused and resources keep getting consumed, but that doesn't seem efficient for cost control.
upvoted 0 times
...
Julio
4 months ago
I practiced a similar question, and I feel like the node should go into a hibernation state, but I could be mixing it up with another topic.
upvoted 0 times
...
Brett
4 months ago
I remember something about nodes being powered off or hibernated, but I can't recall which one is correct for scaling down.
upvoted 0 times
...
Marget
4 months ago
I think when nodes are scaled down, they might be deleted from the infrastructure provider, but I'm not entirely sure if that's the right term.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jonell
4 months ago
This is a tricky one. I'm not entirely sure about the differences between the options, like what "CAPI deleted" or "paused in Kubernetes" actually means. I'll have to make an educated guess here and hope I get it right.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ngoc
4 months ago
Okay, I think I've got a good handle on this. Based on the information provided, I believe the correct answer is that the node is changed to a status of Power-Off for stand-by. That makes the most sense for an auto-scaling scenario where resources need to be conserved.
upvoted 0 times
...
Phuong
5 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about this one. The options seem to describe different ways the node could be handled, but I'm not sure which one is the correct behavior. I'll have to think this through carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Antonio
5 months ago
This seems like a straightforward question about how nodes are scaled down in an auto-scaling environment. I'll carefully read through the options and think about the expected behavior.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tyisha
8 months ago
But wouldn't pausing the node in Kubernetes be more efficient to save resources?
upvoted 0 times
...
Elke
8 months ago
I disagree, I believe the correct answer is C) Node is changed to a status of Power-Off for stand-by.
upvoted 0 times
...
Roxane
8 months ago
Alright, time to put on my scaling hat! Option B seems like the best way to keep those cloud costs under control. No need to hibernate or pause, just straight-up delete that node.
upvoted 0 times
Dorothy
7 months ago
Mayra: Definitely, no need to keep unnecessary resources running.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mayra
7 months ago
User 2: I think so too, deleting the node completely makes sense.
upvoted 0 times
...
Man
7 months ago
User 1: I agree, Option B is the most efficient way to control costs.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Elbert
8 months ago
Wow, this question is really making me hungry. I could go for a nice power nap, like option C. That sounds pretty tasty right about now.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alishia
8 months ago
Hold up, did anyone else notice the 'CAPI' part? That's got to be the key here. B is the only option that mentions that acronym, so I'm going with it.
upvoted 0 times
Daron
7 months ago
Yeah, B makes the most sense considering the CAPI reference. Let's go with that.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tish
7 months ago
I agree, B seems like the most logical option based on the information provided.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lettie
7 months ago
I think you're onto something with that CAPI mention. B does seem like the right choice.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Tyisha
8 months ago
I think the answer is A) Node is changed to a status of Hibernate.
upvoted 0 times
...
Meghan
8 months ago
Hmm, I'm not sure about that. Wouldn't pausing the node in Kubernetes be a more efficient way to save resources? Option D sounds like the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
Pansy
7 months ago
I agree, option D sounds like the best choice to save resources.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nobuko
7 months ago
I think pausing the node in Kubernetes would be more efficient.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Peter
8 months ago
I think the correct answer is B. Removing the node from the infrastructure provider makes the most sense for controlling cloud costs.
upvoted 0 times
Truman
7 months ago
I think option A might be a good choice as well, hibernating the node could save on resources.
upvoted 0 times
...
Giuseppe
7 months ago
I agree, option C seems like a good choice for cost control.
upvoted 0 times
...
Steffanie
8 months ago
I believe the correct answer is C. Changing the node to a status of Power-Off for stand-by would also help in controlling costs.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gail
8 months ago
I think the correct answer is B. Removing the node from the infrastructure provider makes the most sense for controlling cloud costs.
upvoted 0 times
...
...

Save Cancel